I know I've been harping on time speeding up closer to gravity, closer to the gravitational CENTER, but still seeing time slow down right around the center, as Special Relativity shows. The reason for this is a paradox of frequency and density.

This is stuff I'm going to have to go through, but I just like examining that opposite "devil's advocate" position of relativity, because it's like a little crack in the door that by examining the opposite point of view could reveal more.

I'm not going to include such a confusing matrix of thought into any book, though. This is just working it out on this website which is a good workspace for it. Why not?

​

Here it comes:

Bob Lazar had told us though something that is worth notice: the candle in the gravity beam freezes in time, and does not melt in the gravity field, but the candle fire is frozen in time (along with the candle) while the gravity beam is turned on, yet STILL emitting light, showing light is beyond space and time (light-based unity).

Frozen time however does not imply lack of motion! What it does imply is that by using a gravity beam (vertical core), it would make time stand still while a distance in space can be crossed, further implying that it would take no time at all (literally) to cross a distance. Obviously using gravity is going to be inducing motion.

It does not mean that Earth time goes faster to someone crossing a vast distance in space. It means that if a distance in space takes no time to cross, then frequencies are very high. Relatively, it would appear that the ship moves much, much faster IN TIME to cross a vast distance of space to an outside observer. Relative to the pilots, it would appear that time literally stands still to cross a vast distance of space.

This is what I've been trying to explain, because that above is pure paradox; and the paradox is very difficult to understand, although it is very simplistic in what it does.

We do actually observe (witnesses) UFO's (ours or theirs) doing this. There are also Secret Space Program accounts of what the pilots experience. It's a match.

So in a starship,when a gravity source is in motion at the speed of light, time really does increase to cross a vast distance very quickly, as seen from an outside observer, AND the pilots experience it taking very little time to do so, which again, is a MATCH.

The sun doesn't actually move around at the speed of light, zipping here and there, but if it did, we would be able to measure the exact opposite of what Special Relativity claims.

Both cases are both real. It can be seen that not only does time slow down near gravity, but also time speeds up closer to gravity, just depending upon relative frames of motion and position, and dealing with specific engine geometry, in paradoxical frames of relativity (depending on what "angle" we perform our measurement / observations).

Paradox Resolved!

​Do we believe Bob Lazar? Well there is CERTAINLY reason to do so.

This also explains why I've been saying that time increases near gravity, BECAUSE IF A GRAVITY SOURCE IS IN MOTION THROUGH SPACE, then THAT is where the Relativity reverses and it becomes True.

It actually makes for common sense, doesn't it?

If a black hole could move across space at the speed of light, Relativity ACTUALLY REVERSES! From the point of view of the black hole at motion, time would stand still and the universe of the black hole (all of the reality of all of the star systems at a distance AWAY-FROM Self) would appear to be suspended in time, but outside observers would see time moving extremely fast as it moves also in that higher frequency, seeing its motion and course through space moving at such high speeds it would be difficult to even imagine! ​

When examining a frame of relativity, a frame of very rapid motion can be viewed as a STATIC Relative frame, EVEN THOUGH IT IS IN MOTION.

That's where I've made my mistake all this time, treating a relative frame of rapid motion as a still frame to examine, but being confused on it, because I'm the one at rest examining a static (non-moving) frame OF motion. I should have known better, because what is Static does not imply stationary or non-moving, but ONLY relative to the observer.

​

Just think! If a gravity beam projects in front of the ship, and yet that projection also creates space to move into the ship, pulling the ship along, then that is quite the paradox! That projection in a beam of stillness is filled with the motion of the ship. As the ship travels into the future (forward), it moves through time in a much different way. It moves into the next space of still time, and then the space after, and the space after, each moment the same second as the past moment. It can always be known that the space in front of the ship is the SAME moment as it has always been while the ship moves.

It means the ship moves through space in the same moment of time, so it does not take time to move through space.

That is a very beautiful way to see it, without the harshness of calculation to take away from the appreciation of what it is.

​

Please read the comment to this article for the rest of the story. I didn't want to include it in this article, so as not to take away from the focus of this article.​

A single proton isn't really a source of gravity, in what we can really work with any real force. A single proton accelerated near light speed, that becomes a gravity source, rather in an expanded geometry of a circle in which it is constantly travelling. That ring becomes the gravity source. It would be hard to move that ring around though. How would we? Gravity is a wave. Take two protons (or proton streams) super-accelerated in opposite directions (paradoxical geometry) in a ring. The waveforms cancel and allows it to move more freely, and that is our gravity cancellation mechanism. Using gravity to move our gravity source is the goal, and it requires specific engine geometry. Now we have a unity-vortex developing. Now we have enough universal dimensions to actually start to work with something, in an expanded frame of universal INNER geometry. Just keep that in mind!

A gravity ENGINE is a wee bit different from a gravity SOURCE. The engine is in motion and is designed to move and to travel. Held still, we see the dimensions of the universe at a different relative angle. Stillness and Motion, the Yin Yang. The Paradox only unifies in one direction, however. According to that geometry, one gravitational monopole is all that is needed.

A magnetic monopole is an easy thing to construct. Take a steel rod, and place magnets around that rod at the bottom, all facing north-in. Now that rod becomes a North Pole mono-pole.

This is just something to consider, because energy is generated paradoxically. Otherwise the only way to harness light energy is to force it into paradoxical geometry, such as how a solar cell works.

With a monopole gravity force (a gravity beam in one direction creating motion in one direction, say "forward"), then that engine geometry can make use of a unity of nonpolarity and noncausality (quantum mechanics). Quantum mechanics is not a duality system, but a paradoxical system!

Please see the Baumgartner download on the home page to have a better understanding of vortex geometry.

I'm not including this above in the article, because I don't want to take from the purity of that paradoxical relation of unity.

See Warp Drive Engineering for the rest.

Reply

LAU

1/25/2016 08:08:49 pm

Oh, by the way, you can take a steel rod and stick some magnets all north pole facing in in the middle of the rod even to make the rod one magnetic north pole. (the magnets don't HAVE to be at the bottom).

Reply

Leave a Reply.

LAU

Updates and Design Improvements; Further Understanding and Applicability